From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...
Alstrin v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company
United States District Court for the District of Delaware
179 F. Supp. 2d 376 (2002)
J. Christopher Alstrin, Melvin Pearl, Jeffrey Taylor, Bruce Taylor, and Sidney Taylor (plaintiffs) were former officers and directors of the Cole Taylor Financial Group, Inc. (Cole). The plaintiffs were defendants in a securities class-action lawsuit and adversary proceedings asserting claims for fraudulent conveyance and breach of fiduciary duty brought by Cole’s bankruptcy estate representative. Cole had a directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance policy with National Union (defendant) that covered loss arising from a claim. The term “claim” was defined under the policy as “a civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding for monetary or on monetary relief.” The policy also covered a “Securities Claim,” which was defined in part as a claim that “alleges a violation of the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 . . . which alleges a Wrongful Act in connection with the claimant’s purchase or sale” of company securities. “Wrongful Act” was defined as “any breach of duty, neglect, error, misstatement, misleading statement, omission, or act by the Directors and Officers of the Company in their respective capacities as such . . . .” The policy also contained three exclusions. Exclusion 4(c) excluded claims arising from “the committing in fact of any criminal or deliberate fraud.” Exclusion 4(a) excluded claims arising from “the gaining in fact of any profit or advantage to which an insured was not legally entitled.” Exclusion 4(i) excluded claims “brought by any Insured or by the Company . . . .” The plaintiffs brought a coverage dispute, seeking coverage from National Union under the D&O Policy the securities class-action lawsuit and estate representative’s adversary proceedings. The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment, claiming that the exclusions did not apply to their claims and that National Union’s interpretation of the exclusions would negate the coverage under the policy.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (McKelvie, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.